You're obviously attached to your WotC stuff, so we'll agree to disagree here if you will... (I, myself, no longer suffer from that weird 3.5 conservatist mentality, especially since I put all my 3.5 stuff out for sale... (...)

Where did you get that from? Take a step back Mr Pink, I've never been emotionally attached to WotC, neither I am to Paizo now. Allows me having an objective look. I also never bought the 3.5 stuff and staid with my 3.0 books so I'm not going to buy them from you now :P (never been a marketing victim). You loved WotC yesterday and are burning them now, you might do the same with Paizo in few years... I'm less emotional so I don't develop a fanboy attitude regarding games I play contrary to you apparently. You can disagree as much as you will, we didn't even start having a discussion anyway.

James Jacobs wrote:

(...)

Anyway... sorry the errors are ruining the game for you.
(...)

Fortunately it's not ruining my game. I understand your constraints, the difficulty of the task and appreciate that you'll fix the subsequent versions of the prints and PDFs. I was not and am not going to continue discussing on this thread (except if I find errors), I wanted to express my disappointment about mostly erratas, but it's not going to prevent me from playing. All in all I enjoy the Pathfinder RPG and the direction it takes (except for the artwork :P but I know this is about personal taste).

I started this thread when I first got the PDF and was waiting for the dead tree version. Since it was one of the first threads for the errata it should apply to both versions, since they both would naturally have the same errata.

As noticed by Waldham here, the entry for the Swallow Whole ability only mentions the fact that "Unless otherwise noted, the opponent can be up to one size category smaller than the swallowing creature.", and the entries of the Swallow Whole ability on each creature that possesses it do not mention the 'maximum load capacity' of the gizzard of such creatures.

My temporary solution is to use the old 3.5 'load capacity progression' of the gizzard of such creatures - which was (for the majority of the creatures with Swallow Whole) as follows:

The Darkmantles stats seem to be off unless I'm missing something. There Init is +4 it should be +6 (+2 from DEX is missing). Its AC is 13 it should be 15 (+ 2 from DEX is missing). For its slam it should be +3 if its using STR (+1 small +2 BAB)or +5 if its using DEX. (+1 small +2 BAB +2 Dex). Like I said unless I'm missing something.

An error, and a couple of clarifications: (credits go to Elliander who noticed them here):

Error -> Minotaur:

The entry for the Gore damage is wrong; since the Gore attack is used in conjunction with the Greataxe, it becomes a secondary attack and so while the hit bonus is calculated right (+6 BaB +6, +4 Str, -1 size, -5 Secondary attack = +4), the damage should be only 0,5 Str bonus (and so, 1d6+2).

Clarifications -> Powerful Charge:

The Powerful Charge attack on most monsters deals a damage which is based on double base dice damage and double Str Bonus instead of 1.5 Str Bonus (see Rhinoceros, Wholly Rhinoceros); however, some other creatures (like the Minotaur and the Half-Fiend Minotaur above) have their Powerful Charge attack based on double base dice damage but only Str bonus x 1.5. Why ? Is it right ?

It's probably worth pointing out that the minotaur's gore attack is a secondary attack (and thus gets some downgrades to its attack and damage bonuses) because it's also wielding a weapon. Whenever a creature wields a manufactured weapon, ALL of its natural attacks become secondary attacks.

It's probably worth pointing out that the minotaur's gore attack is a secondary attack (and thus gets some downgrades to its attack and damage bonuses) because it's also wielding a weapon. Whenever a creature wields a manufactured weapon, ALL of its natural attacks become secondary attacks.

That doesn't explain the difference between the Half-Fiend Minotaur and the Minotaur, especially since a Half-Fiend can in theory be applied later in a campaign and there is nothing to explain why that ability would weaken. On the flip side, it would mean that if the Minotaur were to drop his weapon, his natural attacks would be stronger?

The confusion for me is the lack of understanding on how to calculate for a variety of situations, such as no weapon, changed size, etc.

so, in the case of the Half-Fiend Minotaur, are the listed calculations considering that they are weakened by a specific consistent amount to the secondary attack formula?

This may not be errata if the Golarion dolphins have insane lung capacity:

PRD wrote:

Hold Breath (Ex) A dolphin can hold its breath for a number of minutes equal to 6 times its Constitution score before it risks drowning.

16x6=96min! (Orca)

SRD wrote:

Hold Breath (Ex) A whale can hold its breath for a number of rounds equal to 8 × its Constitution score before it risks drowning.

(21*8)/10=16.8min (Orca)

Wiki answers wrote:

A dolphin normally holds it breath for 3-5 minutes (30 seconds for Orca). The longest time a dolphin is comfortable holding its breath is 8 minutes.

I know it's a fantasy world, but did they get an unintended boost?^^

They got an intended boost. Whales in the real world are VERY good at holding their breath. We probably went a bit TOO far in changing the amount of time that an orca or dolphin can hold its breath, though. Might be worth looking at fixing.

This may not be errata if the Golarion dolphins have insane lung capacity:

PRD wrote:

Hold Breath (Ex) A dolphin can hold its breath for a number of minutes equal to 6 times its Constitution score before it risks drowning.

16x6=96min! (Orca)

SRD wrote:

Hold Breath (Ex) A whale can hold its breath for a number of rounds equal to 8 × its Constitution score before it risks drowning.

(21*8)/10=16.8min (Orca)

Wiki answers wrote:

A dolphin normally holds it breath for 3-5 minutes (30 seconds for Orca). The longest time a dolphin is comfortable holding its breath is 8 minutes.

I know it's a fantasy world, but did they get an unintended boost?^^

They got an intended boost. Whales in the real world are VERY good at holding their breath. We probably went a bit TOO far in changing the amount of time that an orca or dolphin can hold its breath, though. Might be worth looking at fixing.

I say leave it like that. In the real world whales don't need multiple attacks to swallow their prey (i.e. CHOMP! --> done! which is why they choose to go back to the surface; otherwise they'd stay longer to match the time of an average feeding time).

They got an intended boost. Whales in the real world are VERY good at holding their breath. We probably went a bit TOO far in changing the amount of time that an orca or dolphin can hold its breath, though. Might be worth looking at fixing.

For a sperm whale I'd agree that they can hold their breath very long (up to 90 minutes), but dolphins and orcas aren't comparatively that good at it.

It's nothing game breaking of course, but I found the 6x increase from 3.5 a bit surprising.

I have a question regarding the wood golem. Its CMD is listed as "25 (30 vs. trip)". I can't see where this bonus against trip is coming from, much less a weird +5 bonus. The golem has no feat that could account for this nor does it have any extra legs.

I'm assuming this is a copy-and-paste-error, probably from the same original creature that also left its CON value of 25 there.

I recently found this error in the Half-Celestial and Half-Fiend descriptions:

Half-Celestial (page 169):
"Smite Evil (Su): Once per day it can deal extra damage equal to its HD (maximum of +20) with a melee attack against an evil foe."

Half-Fiend (page 171):
"Smite Good (Su): Once per day it can add extra damage equal to its HD (maximum of +20) against a good foe."

However, these are the old 3.5 rules included in the SRD, not based on the new rules for Smite developed in Pathfinder.

In fact, the rules for the Smite Evil of Celestial creatures (Template on page 294) say "Special Attacks smite evil 1/day as a swift action (adds Cha bonus to attack rolls and damage bonus equal to HD against evil foes; smite persists until target is dead or the celestial creature rests).", and the rules for the Smite Good of Fiendish creature (Template on pages 294-295) say "Special Attacks
smite good 1/day as a swift action (adds Cha bonus to attack rolls and damage bonus equal to HD against good foes; smite persists until target is dead or the fiendish creature rests)."

Obviously, the Smite ability of less powerful creatures should not be more powerful than that of creatures whose template adds more powerful abilities...

A blue dragon's Sound Imitation requires a Bluff check, but none of the blue dragons have the Bluff skill. Does this mean they're all really bad at imitating sound, should one of their skills be swapped out for Bluff, or was Bluff mistakenly left out of their skills entry?

I'm not sure if this is an intentional choice, but Ogre Perception checks seem too low.

Ogres have a 10 Wisdom, so they're at +0 to their Perception checks. They treat Perception as a class skill, since they're of the Giant subtype. Therefore, they should either have +0 (no ranks in Perception) or at least +4 (1 rank plus 3 for it being a class skill.)

I initially posted this on the wrong thread, but mariliths saves are too high: Fort+25 Ref+18 Will +13.

Marilith has 16 HD, a constitution of 32 and a wisdom of 18,it just doesn't add up.

A Marilith has a constant Unholy Aura effect always active (which gives her a +4 resistance bonus to her saves).

So, we have a creature (outsider) with 2 good saves at +10 and one bad save at +5 (for having 16 HD) - usually the good saves are Reflex and Will, but this is not the case, in fact they are Fortitude and Reflex.

I initially posted this on the wrong thread, but mariliths saves are too high: Fort+25 Ref+18 Will +13.

Marilith has 16 HD, a constitution of 32 and a wisdom of 18,it just doesn't add up.

A Marilith has a constant Unholy Aura effect always active (which gives her a +4 resistance bonus to her saves).

So, we have a creature (outsider) with 2 good saves at +10 and one bad save at +5 (for having 16 HD) - usually the good saves are Reflex and Will, but this is not the case, in fact they are Fortitude and Reflex.

but it seems PF Troglodytes don't smell (or at least they alck the stench ability that they have had in every other version of D&D).

Stench is a universal monster ability. It's in the troglodyte's stat block, but it's not called out in detail there since it's a universal monster ability. It lives in the monster's "aura" section near the top of the stat block.

but it seems PF Troglodytes don't smell (or at least they alck the stench ability that they have had in every other version of D&D).

Stench is a universal monster ability. It's in the troglodyte's stat block, but it's not called out in detail there since it's a universal monster ability. It lives in the monster's "aura" section near the top of the stat block.

Okay, I didn't see this mentioned (in this thread, anyway). The ghaele's light rays are not listed as ranged touch attacks, but the lantern archon's are; both were ranged touch attacks in 3.5. Design change or error?

As a bump, here's another thing I noticed in the Bestiary, but not here:

All the monsters with sorcerer casting get cantrips, as does the lone one with bard casting (azata lillend). The lone monster with druid casting (nymph) gets orisons. But all the cleric casters don't get orisons. The lammasu (a cleric caster) in the Bonus Bestiary does get orisons. I'm hoping this inconsistency is an error, & all monsters with class-based spellcasting do get 0-level spells, else a solar can't detect magic.

Also, the nymph listing mentions not being able to swap out memorized spells for summon spells, but the listings for cleric casters don't mention not being able to swap out memorized spells for cure/inflict spells. However, most of the cleric casters have cure spells memorized as standard, so that would imply that they cannot swap out spells. Which leads me to my follow-up question/point for this post:

What exactly counts as spell use for monsters with cleric casting? So far:
1) no domain use (so no domain spells);
2) most likely no cure/inflict swapping;
3) no orisons, but that may be an oversight (hopefully :crosses fingers:); so what about
4) opposed alignment spells?

This would apply to druid casters as well, I think, & similar questions are raised for sorcerer/bard casters (no bloodlines obviously, but can they switch out known spells every few levels if advancing caster level with base or prestige class levels?)

I went through this post and the other one about the print version and put a small sticker in my copy of the bestiary on each monster's entry indicating an erratum (though not the specifics). Since the official document hasn't come out yet, I'll list the monsters here (sans specific rules errata). Presence on the list means one (or more) rules change, numerical adjustment or missing text, basically everything except for typographical errors in words where the meaning is obvious. Let me know if I missed anything.

This may not be errata if the Golarion dolphins have insane lung capacity:

PRD wrote:

Hold Breath (Ex) A dolphin can hold its breath for a number of minutes equal to 6 times its Constitution score before it risks drowning.

16x6=96min! (Orca)

SRD wrote:

Hold Breath (Ex) A whale can hold its breath for a number of rounds equal to 8 × its Constitution score before it risks drowning.

(21*8)/10=16.8min (Orca)

Wiki answers wrote:

A dolphin normally holds it breath for 3-5 minutes (30 seconds for Orca). The longest time a dolphin is comfortable holding its breath is 8 minutes.

I know it's a fantasy world, but did they get an unintended boost?^^

from a source more reliable then Wiki:

Seaworld.org wrote:

3. Dives up to 10 minutes and longer have been seen, with the longest dive observed in the ocean lasting 12 minutes. Under experimental conditions, killer whales have made dives lasting as long as 15 minutes.

This may not be errata if the Golarion dolphins have insane lung capacity:

There are actually quite a few issues like this with real world animal stats.

For instance, the Cheetah entry allows them to get up to 500' per round (~57 mph) once an hour... while the actual animal can top 70 mph for about a minute followed by a rest of thirty minutes or so.

Bats are listed as having Blindsense (it was Blindsight in v3, but got changed in v3.5 and carried to Pathfinder)... which would mean that in the dark they can only move at half speed, can't distinguish between bugs and other small objects, and have a 50% miss chance on top of the actual attack roll... none of which makes sense for creatures that live in caves and can pinpoint and catch tiny gnats in total darkness.

Dolphins do get Blindsight, but the range is completely off. Assuming the Bottlenose variety, they should really have something like Blindsight 300' and Blindsense 1800'.

Sharks have a short range Blindsight, presumably meant to represent their ability to detect electrical fields (and thus useless against creatures without one - ergo not normal blindsight), but should also have tremorsense from their lateral line.

What's more Bat and Dolphin 'Blindsight/sense' operates only in the direction they are facing while both 'extra' senses in Sharks are omni-directional.

Et cetera. Alot of this comes from attempting to fit real world creatures into standardized rules, game balance, and the like. Generally I go with the book stats for chance encounters, but adjust them closer to 'real world' values for critters which are going to stick around for a while.

Adapting real-world animals into game statistics is tricky. On one side, we want animals to be interesting and thus have unusual abilities that justify having, say, separate stat blocks for leopards and cheetahs. On the other side, they have to be balanced rules-wise... and animals (since they interact so much with classes like druids and rangers) are PARTICULARLY tricky to balance, since they have to serve both as monsters AND as player resources.

So sometimes animals end up getting some strange powers and abilities that don't quite map to the real world. This was an even bigger problem, I felt, in 3.5. We tried to correct them in Pathfinder, but obviously didn't get them all. Does that mean that the animal stats are not 100% accurate to real world versions? Sure. Does it mean that the stats are broken/unusable in the game? Absolutely not.

Adapting real-world animals into game statistics is tricky. On one side, we want animals to be interesting and thus have unusual abilities that justify having, say, separate stat blocks for leopards and cheetahs. On the other side, they have to be balanced rules-wise... and animals (since they interact so much with classes like druids and rangers) are PARTICULARLY tricky to balance, since they have to serve both as monsters AND as player resources.

So sometimes animals end up getting some strange powers and abilities that don't quite map to the real world. This was an even bigger problem, I felt, in 3.5. We tried to correct them in Pathfinder, but obviously didn't get them all. Does that mean that the animal stats are not 100% accurate to real world versions? Sure. Does it mean that the stats are broken/unusable in the game? Absolutely not.

LOL,

Another reason when you're making up your own worlds, populate them with real world analogs. Animals that aren't real world animals, but have similar builds and functions in the environment. :) Then any differences are species specific, not a case of game not matching real world (since that Frivit Cheetah analog really can only run at 60mph once every hour). :)

Just to be on topic, and I may have missed it, so if I did, please pardon me. But Elemental's seem to have lost their immunity to their own element? I ask because this came up in a game this week. A water elemental took ice damage, but I couldn't find in either the elemental stat blocks, nor in the elemental subtypes, that they were immune to their own elements. Seems a little wierd for a fire elemental to take damage from fire. Although I can see a water elemental taking cold damage (albeit more of an entangle than actual hps).

In fact, only fire elementals have a type that's DIRECTLY linked to one of the five energy types. And they automatically gain immunity to fire because they have the fire subtype.

The other three (air, earth, water) aren't 100% tied to acid, electricity, cold, or sonic at all, and never have been, really.

Ah, Thanks James and Sean.

I missed the one on Fire, that's the one that really threw me for a loop, the rest I can at least see (acid eating stone, electricity 'ionizing' air, cold freezing water). Although I would think Air might be immune to sonic (air passes sound all the time without damaging it, you can't actually damage the air with sound, no matter how high you set the frequency or strength of the sound wave).

Can someone tell me why the Skills section of many creatures does not include certain skills...

Is the Skills section ONLY supposed to include skills that have ranks in them? I'm having a hard time determining the logic. The monster creation rules don't state that you only include the skills with ranks but there are some monsters where a skill is not included in the Skills section, some where it is, some where a monster receives a racial bonus to a skill that is not listed in the Skills block...

Can someone tell me why the Skills section of many creatures does not include certain skills...

Is the Skills section ONLY supposed to include skills that have ranks in them? I'm having a hard time determining the logic. The monster creation rules don't state that you only include the skills with ranks but there are some monsters where a skill is not included in the Skills section, some where it is, some where a monster receives a racial bonus to a skill that is not listed in the Skills block...

Ugh. What's the rule here? Is there one?

As far as I know you don't get your racial bonus without at least 1 rank of that skill taken. (eg. You don't get the class bonus for a class skill without taking at least 1 rank in that skill).

IMO a skill should be listed if it has any bonuses from ranks, racial, or feat. Basically, if 1d20+relevantAbilityScore+sizeModIfAny wouldn't give you the correct value, do the math for the GM and list the skill.

From where I stand for the Adventure Paths, I generally try to make sure that monsters get all skills that they have ranks in listed in their skill block. If they have racial modifiers to those skills, I tend to include them as well. And sometimes, if they have neither, but the skill is important (such as the case of an encounter with an ankheg in a flooded warren) I'll list the monster's skill (Swim, in that anhkheg's case) even if it doesn't have any ranks or racial modifiers to it.

But at the VERY least, any skill that's got any skill ranks in it should be listed.

I don't know if these have been mentioned yet:
(This is what the online PRD Bestiary says)

Ankylosaurus: Stun Ability
It says DC23 but doesn't say what Save Type, and it isn't a universal ability AFAIK. I'd say Fort, but it needs to say.

Universal Ability: Trample
It says 'works just like the overrun combat maneuver, but the trampling creature does not need to make a check'. If it works just like Over-Run, and the Trample creature does not have Improved Over-Run (which most don't, Bison have Improved Bull-Rush but not Improved Over-Run), can't the target just choose to step out of the way? The text says if they choose not to take the AoO they can try to avoid the damage by a Reflex Save for 1/2 damage, but this wording doesn't actually counter the fact they can simply step out of the way if it indeed 'works just like Over-Run'. I think the INTENT is that the Reflex for 1/2 is REPLACING the normal way to avoid a non-Improved Over-Run, but the ability needs the wording to support that.
Also, it is sort of implicit in the idea of "Trampling", but it needs to actually say that the target is automatically knocked Prone ('normally' requring beating the DC by 5+ if you rolled, but Trample doesn't roll). I don't think leaving it up to the reader to know they should apply a status condition because it's obvious is the best approach here.

IMO a skill should be listed if it has any bonuses from ranks, racial, or feat. Basically, if 1d20+relevantAbilityScore+sizeModIfAny wouldn't give you the correct value, do the math for the GM and list the skill.

Then you might like my online monsters pages. All skills are listed and calculated. Check out http://prpg.imarvintpa.com/Monsters.php?id=1066

I'm in the middle of verifying all of the skill point allocations and need some pointers on what makes some skills Cross-class and others not. Lots of skills are getting a +3 bonus that were not in the book.

When I'm done, I plan on exporting a list of suspicious monster-skills and what I did to get their ranks to match the expected values.